Freemasonry has various mottoes, which represent the principles of our great tradition. Among these is Deus Meumque Jus, which often appears prominently on Masonic Regalia, most notably that of the 32nd and 33rd degrees. A phrase being featured so prominently on Regalia for the highest degrees implies tremendous significance, but what does it mean?

Let’s explore the possible meanings of this motto, and the role it plays in the Masonic life.

The actual history of the phrase is rather long and complex, and won’t be the focus of this article. Suffice it to say, in the words of one Masonic writer:

…the motto is the Latin version of a French phrase that originated in England and used in a Masonic degree system named after Scotland that descended from French sources by way of Haiti with the help of a Dutch trader through Jamaica and eventually almost completely redefined in the United States.

It’s also associated with the number 33, as it is usually featured on the 33rd Degree’s Regalia, and the inside of the ring worn by 33rd Degree Masons. Significance is ascribed to the number 33 in a variety of ways, it being sacred in religions ranging from Christianity to Hinduism, and there being 33 vertebrae in the spinal column, to name a couple. However, today we’re focusing on the phrase itself.

What Is This Right?

Everything in Freemasonry, especially in the more mystical Universal Co-Masonry, carries significance beyond its literal or historical definitions, or translations. There are many possible interpretations of the meaning behind Deus Meumque Jus; historically, it has some connection to the concept of the Divine Right of Kings, in which case it would mean “my right to rule is derived from God.” However, given the role of Freemasons in the institution of democracy in the Western world, it seems hard to believe that it’s meaning in the fraternity has much connection to justification for monarchy.

The interpretation “God and my moral rightness” is more in alignment with the origin of the latin translation, and would mean the interpretation would be more along the lines of connecting one’s relationship to the Creator to moral uprightness. However, this concept alone is unsatisfying; after all, don’t all people who believe in a higher power connect their morality to that concept, in some way or another? Why would this then be a special phrase reserved for the highest degrees of Freemasonry?

Divine Right to Rule the Inner Kingdom?

Perhaps a more profound interpretation of this phrase might be that it represents an inner reign of the divine, within each individual Mason. Aspects of the structure of Masonic Ritual indicate an outer mirroring of inner elements of one’s being, and a very clear hierarchy and order to them. Without spoiling too much for the as-yet uninitiated, the gist of this concept is that the functioning of the Lodge and Masonic ritual lays out a blueprint by which the various aspects of the self may be “put to order” so that the lower aspects of self are made to be the servants of the divine within.

Viewed through this lens, Deus Meumque Jus would be inward law and order (Jus) established within the self (Meumque), by the divine self (Deus) as the Sovereign.

Yet another interpretation would be something more along gnostic lines, and given gnosticism’s role in the Esoteric traditions informing Freemasonry, it’s not such a stretch to apply this lens, as well. From a gnostic perspective, Deus could pertain not only the inner divine spark, but also to the demiurge which gnostic thinking generally believes to be the creator of the material world in which we find ourselves. In this interpretation, perhaps the Right being referred to may be less about divine authority within the self, and more about one’s Right to transcend the trappings of this flawed material creation of the demi-urge, to realize the potential contained in one’s divine spark, via gnosis.

Actually, these two more mystical interpretations are not entirely incompatible. One could say that the inner sovereignty over one’s own lower nature, and the right to transcend a demiurge-designed reality are one and the same. After all, the primary way in which we are ensnared in the physical world, according to gnosticism, is via these bodies and their lower natures. To be Sovereign over them would mean to transcend them.

Tradition, Transcendence, or Both?

While the phrase Deus Meumque Jus has a complex history and is embedded in a long tradition relating to monarchy and various esoteric societies, it also has tremendous symbolic significance. We could even relate it to the Yogic concept of gaining complete control of all the lower aspects of the self, even the nerve centers which control breathing and the heartbeat, as part of the process of one’s advancement towards Liberation. Perhaps there are correlations between the Western Gnostic concept of inner sovereignty, and this Eastern correlate.

What is the true meaning of this Masonic motto? The only way to find out is to become a Freemason, and progress through the degrees, for only in the Masonic ritual is the true meaning revealed.

I said that I would tell you something of the truths I hold, not of all the truths I hold, but of those which are at the foundation—my ultimate truths. There is, I feel, one truth of truths, one truth which includes all others—the Unity of All Life. We know science has demonstrated that life is everywhere, though the word ”life” is not so easy to define; shall we say ‘’growth,” “unfoldment”?

In every kingdom of Nature, life is all-pervading. Even that which we call death is only change. We know that not only do our individualities persist after death, but also that the physical body, whence the individuality has departed, is not in itself dead, though it disintegrates.

Every particle of nature is life, whether, for purposes of our own, we call it “dead” or “alive.” But what is more, is that this all-pervading life is essentially one, whatever its form—the same fundamental characteristics everywhere, as science again knows. Here these characteristics sharper, keener, more definite, more sensitive, more complex; there these characteristics duller, simpler, vaguer. But the same vital principles, the same type of reaction to external stimulus.

THE KINGDOM OF NATURE

In every kingdom of Nature, there is some kind of feeling or sensation, some kind of happiness, some kind of fear, some kind of disease or illness, some kind of death. It sounds too strange to be true, yet science asserts these facts. They can be demonstrated by physical experiments.

We do not generally associate these conditions either with the mineral, the vegetable, or the animal kingdom; but that is our ignorance. We must readjust ourselves to the fact of the Unity of all Life, which means the Brotherhood of all Life, and when we say Brotherhood we contact the second great truth, the logical sequence from the first. It is that life grows, evolves. No stopping still. And we begin to talk of a ladder of this growing, of a ladder of evolution, with rung upon rung marking the different stages of growth, or of expansion.

Hence, each kingdom of Nature represents a stage of growth or unfoldment. Dull characteristics of life in the mineral kingdom. Less dull characteristics, increasing sensitiveness, in the vegetable kingdom. Still greater sensitiveness in the animal, greater definiteness, more power of movement, increased complexity of unfoldment. And then the human kingdom in which you and I are.

We probably know more or less what it is that makes us different from animals mind, for one thing, conscience for another, bigger purpose for a third, and so on. But the same life, just as there is the same life in the acorn as in the oak. Nourishment may be derived from outside, but it would be of little use unless the acorn could take it in, had the sagacity to assimilate it.

What do we conclude from all this? Surely that the human kingdom is not the final stage of growth. If kingdoms below us, why not kingdoms beyond us? Do we know nothing of them? No, nor do most animals know aught of the human kingdom. But some animals do, and I claim that some humans know of kingdoms beyond the human. Perhaps Angels belong to one of these. Perhaps the great Teachers and Saviors of the world belong to one of these.

THE BROTHERHOOD OF MANKIND

“Seek and ye shall find; knock and it shall be opened unto you.”

Ought we not to try to understand a little more what this brotherhood means—brothers younger than ourselves, our brothers the animals, as Saint Francis so beautifully realized and practiced; our brothers the trees, the flower, the shrub, the grass, yes, and the weeds, and the prickly pear; our brothers the stones, the humble youngest brother stones and the flower of the mineral kingdom—the diamond, the ruby, the sapphire, the emerald. Read what Ruskin says about the lives of these beautiful brothers in his “Ethics of the Dust.” But all this is about younger brothers.

There are our equal brothers, our human brothers, some, perhaps, not quite so old as others, but less distance between them than between us and our animal, vegetable and mineral brothers. No distinctions of race, or creed, or caste, or sex, or color, make any difference. These are all superficial.

Sometimes in our pride, we like to think ourselves superior. Sometimes we think people inferior because they look different from ourselves, eat differently, dress differently, sleep differently, live differently, feel and think and speak differently. That is merely a passing phase of self-preservation. What we are and have we like best; it is largely habit, and no doubt it is, to a certain extent, though not merely as much as we think, best for us. But then we begin to make the fatal mistake of imagining that it is therefore best for everybody else, and that people who have different things have worse things—a different religion, therefore a worse religion; different customs, therefore worse customs, a different nationality; therefore, a worse nationality. Very childish, and very untrue, of course; but not unnatural at a certain stage, though by this time the world ought to be quitting some of its childish ways.

ASCENDING THE LADDER

Now, if there are our younger brothers and our equal brothers, logic demands that there shall be elder brothers, some a little older but not much, some considerably older, some far older, so much older that we cannot imagine their human origin, it is so far back. The Great Saviors are our Eldest Brethren.

The life so perfect and magnificent in Them has been on every rung of the great ladder of life, and now has reached, well, I dare not say the topmost rung—who shall set a limit to God’s omnipotence—but on a rung far removed from our own, so far removed that for us it is the top: we can see and dream no further. And, yet, mark you, there are the two great lines that hold the rungs together, stretching from the bottom, as we must call it, to the top as we must equally call it—one ladder, one path, one origin, one goal. We look beneath us and see where our footsteps have been placed. We gaze above us and perceive the places on which our feet have yet to stand. And on each rung we see the clinging life, stretching ever upwards to the rung above.

I do not think I want or need any more truths. This unity, this evolution, this immeasurable and transcendent brotherhood, this certainty, this purpose, this power—what more do I need to make life intelligible and wonderfully worth living?

WHAT IS GOD?

Do I need God? All is God. I have been speaking of God all the time. I am God. You are God. The animal is God. The vegetable is God. The mineral is God. God is the ladder, God the rung, God the growth, God the origin and end, if end there be.

What do I mean by God? I mean Life. Is there a Person God? I do not know, nor need I care, for there are Those on rungs above me Who are enough Gods to give me all that God could give. Perhaps the sun, the Giver of Life, perhaps He is God; but who shall say He is God the ultimate? And who need care. His sunshine is our growth, come that sunshine whence it may.

Do I need to say that God is Love? When I know the brotherhood, I know love. Only as I am ignorant of the brotherhood of life are my eyes blinded to the all-pervading love. Love is everywhere. Life disproves this, you say. I say to you:

“Know the brotherhood of life, and you shall perceive the Love of God.“

Do I need to say that God is justice? When I know the brotherhood of life I know His justice. Only ignorance blinds me to His justice.

When you are at your noblest, how do all these things strike you? When you merge your lower self in the greater self under the transmuting magic of wondrous music, of noble utterance, of soul-stirring landscape, of sight or hearing of fine heroism, do you not for a moment, even if only for a moment, feel one with all the world? Do you not feel your brotherhood with all? Do you not feel as if you could do anything for anybody? Do you not see ns petty much that in the lower self you thought as right and proper? Do you not feel, just for the moment, as if you could do great things, were dedicated to a noble mission and exalted purposes?

Such, my friends, is the real you, the you that can climb, must and snail climb, rung after rung beyond the one on which you stand. In such a self, not only do you know these truths of which I have been speaking, you have become these truths; you are these truths. And you perceive how gloriously worthwhile it is to climb, if such are the heights which shall be reached, if such the glory into which you enter. The vision fades, perchance, as the magic ceases. But, nevermore, can you stay where you are.

ONWARD AND FORWARD

Evermore must you climb, and you know that the Truth of truths—the Unity of Life—means that we climb together, that we cannot climb alone, and that, therefore, there is no climbing save as we aid others to climb. We climb as we seek the feet of Those who are stretched on the Cross of Loving Sacrifice.

May each one of us become a Cross of Loving Sacrifice! For the Way of the Cross is the hope of the world!

As always, this writing does not represent the official views of Universal Co-Masonry, but is simply the reflections of one Co-Mason.

The figure of the Devil is among the most prominent and significant religious figures in the world today, particularly in the Abrahamic family of religions that have come to dominate the globe. The contrast between God (or his representative) and the devil is taken to be one of the most fundamental dynamics of many religious worldviews, even to the point that Satan serves as a symbol for those who oppose or criticize religion. Even for the non-religious, it’s impossible to deny the significance of the devil as an archetype in our culture.

Today, I’d like to take a slightly different approach: Is it possible that the entire concept of the devil emerges directly from a certain limited concept of God?

Our Father, Who Art In Heaven

Inasmuch as the Devil is a shadow figure, perhaps even the quintessential iconoclastic antithesis to all that is regarded as good or holy, it represents the unconscious “dark” elements that are regarded as the opposite of the divine. In other words, the devil becomes the shadow aspect of God, and within us, the shadow of our own divinity. Whether or not a literal, supernatural entity that we might identify as the devil exists, we can see this symbolic truth. We can also surmise that the most essential quality of the devil is rebellion or resistance to the divine will, for the sake of self-gratification, and so represents the temptation each of us feels to indulge in personal pleasure, at the expense of our moral principles or nobler priorities.

All of this presupposes a divine ruler on high, sitting on a throne in heaven, issuing commands, directing angelic activities, hearing and responding to prayers, even feeling gratified or displeased with earthly events. This is the image of God described in the Abrahamic faiths, often taken quite literally by believers. Even less anthropomorphic concepts of a monotheistic God are generally finite, in this way. God is thought of as a being who is somewhere, perceiving events, doing things, even peering into our very hearts and whispering in our minds, a sort of ultimate person above all lesser people, or as the saying goes, “King of Kings, Lord of Lords.”

Given all of this, it seems inevitable that out of this supreme, uber-person-God’s many created lesser beings, one of them would eventually question his position and rebel, and as it so happens, Lucifer was the first angel created, and the leader of the rebellion not long after. The relatively recent origins of this idea can be picked apart at an academic level, but nevertheless, it is the dominant devil mythology of the dominant religion of our time, Christianity.

Father and the Rebel

“Return of the Prodigal Son” by Rembrandt

Of course, if God is an authority figure, there has to be an anti-authority rebel. How else could it be? If the devil hadn’t gone rogue, a human surely would have. The real question we should be asking ourselves is: should we take either of these two concepts seriously?

It’s no secret that many intellectuals have been critical, if not outright rejecting of this traditional concept of God and the devil. It seems too obvious how this uber-person was simply created by human minds, attempting to imagine a divine authority based on earthly authorities, or perhaps being imposed upon them by those earthly authorities as a justification for their rule.

If you want your sovereignty supported by your subjects, be sure you have the endorsement of the highest authority. Even regular philosophers have increasingly questioned and rejected this idea, from the time they gained the right to do so without being tortured and killed.

Likewise, it’s difficult not to see the utility of the penultimate bad boy devil as both a scapegoat for our human failings and a scare tactic to keep the pews filled. That’s not to say that this dynamic duo doesn’t have symbolic value and that these stories aren’t useful in helping to shape human behavior towards a better trajectory. This is especially true for those who have trouble understanding a more rational concept of God. But for the rest of us, how else might we understand God, and is the devil even necessary?

Light Casts No Shadow

If we look to the many religions of the world, there are some for whom the figure of penultimate evil is either nonexistent or has a much lesser emphasis. It’s no coincidence that these also have quite different views on the nature of God, as well. We can easily see in this comparison how it is precisely the authoritarian concept of God which produces our angelic rebel. After all, without heavenly authority, who would he have to rebel against?

In Buddhism, for instance, while some variations may carry over personifications of evil from their polytheistic precursors, in general, the only enemy of mankind is ignorance itself. Likewise in Hinduism, while various Gods and Goddesses represent manifestations of “aspects” of God, even the dark or destructive ones are seen as mere parts in the divine play or dance of creation. In Paganism, Taoism, and occult or esoteric traditions the world over, there is likewise little-to-no concept of an embodiment of all evil, or at least not one that carries the same cosmic significance and literal personification as the Abrahamic devil.

What else do all of these various non-Abrahamic traditions have in common? You guessed it, a quite different concept of God, or the divine. While there are minor differences, they tend towards a view of God as a universal mind, or omnipresent, transcendent cosmic consciousness, like the Hindu Brahman. Even the mystical elements of Abrahamic faiths, such as Christian Mystics, Islamic Sufis, and Jewish Kabbalists have less anthropomorphic, more mystical concepts of God, and emphasize the devil less.

Many thinkers have proposed that these varying views are merely stages in a linear evolutionary development of our understanding of God, and that each can serve various people, depending on their capability to comprehend. For many, perhaps the simpler stories and images can suffice. In Freemasonry, each Mason is entitled to his or her own religious belief and conception of God, however personal or mystical; only the belief in a higher power is required.

While we make no bones about the esoteric nature of our beliefs and interests in Universal Co-Masonry, what may be missed by many is the connection which this esotericism, in general, has to a historical divide within perhaps all religions. While we may know the history of religion or at least the religious tradition(s) we’ve been closest to in our lives, do we know their esoteric history? Do they all have an esoteric history? What is the purpose of this split between the esoteric (inner) and exoteric (outer) teachings?

The word occult means hidden, and can be used interchangeably with esoteric, but what is it hiding from? Did this secretiveness arise simply to avoid the persecution of the church in the Middle Ages and Renaissance, as we’re often led to believe, or has concealment always been in its nature?

The Shamanic Thread in Religions

It would be absurd to attempt to tell any sort of true history of religion in the context of a single blog post, but I do want to highlight what is most relevant to the topic. In doing so, I think it’s useful to return to the beginning.

Where did religion begin? Archaeologically, we see the dim traces of the beginnings of religion as signified by cave paintings and burial sites, the point at which humans began honoring and burying our dead. In truth, we know very little about this twilight of belief.

Female Shaman (Khakas 1908)

The first instance of religion which we have more direct experience and knowledge of is that which occurs in tribes, which has come to be referred to by anthropologists as Shamanism. We see shamans in the indigenous tribes we encounter and study in modern times, and we assume that this system must have been present from our own beginnings and that these people serve as a glimpse into our past; for the moment, I’ll work with this assumption without question.

Shamanism involves a minority of the tribe, often only a single shaman and one or more apprentices, serving as the interface between the spiritual realms and the tribe. What makes the shaman unique is that he or she is able to communicate with the world beyond the senses in a way that most aren’t, whether through natural capacities, or the use of psychoactive plants. In the case of Shamanism, we can clearly see the beginnings of a “mystical minority” of the population, who are acknowledged and even vital to the tribe.

Growth, Monopoly, and Compartmentalization

As we move forward through the progressive trajectory of civilization, we see the same pattern but with changes over time. As people developed kingdoms and larger civilizations, they also began to build separate structures within each city, and temples emerged as spaces uniquely devoted to interfacing with the divine. It’s interesting to note that, just as the various buildings physically cordoned off each “area” of life, with the government here, the market there, etc., so too did religion begin to be separated. It became less and less woven into the whole of life, as was more-so the case in the tribe, and became something you do “there” specifically.

Egyptian Tree of Life

Furthermore, we might even say that this, in fact, was the beginning of religion, inasmuch as religion describes a specific, separate domain of human activity; if this be the case, then we can recognize that the emergence of religion was a product of the divvying up of life into categories, and simultaneously, a continuation of the shamanic tradition. All of the above was also mostly relevant in cities, while the people living in villages still relied on shamanic figures for much of the time, until the priesthood of the city began to replace the shamans and druids with priests.

As far as we know, the esoteric side of religion also emerged during this time. Greece and Rome had their mystery schools, the Hindu kingdoms had their Brahmins and Yogis, Israel their prophets and later their Kabbalists, etc.

However, this mysticism wasn’t necessarily separated from the priesthood. In ancient Greece, for instance, it was expected or even required to undergo the initiations, in order to be a priest, or for that matter, any other prominent and influential member of society. Since these things weren’t always recorded, we may never fully know just how connected the various esoteric traditions and their correlating priesthoods were.

The Standard Deviation from the Mundane

A question that I find very interesting is: Why has this mystical minority seemingly always existed? Are they simply those which are smarter, less “neurotypical”, more prone to transition between different states of consciousness, or more likely to experiment with psychoactive drugs? Or could it be some combination of all these things?

It’s commonly understood that many things, including human traits like height, IQ, blood pressure, and salaries, occur in the form of a normal distribution, or bell curve. This just means that when you plot them on a graph, the majority are “normal” and so the middle of the graph is the largest, and the further from normal you get in either direction, the more it slopes off, like the edges of a bell, with fewer people being abnormal.

IQ Bell Curve

Could it be that whatever trait or collection of traits contributes to someone being open to, and capable of embracing the mystical side of life more completely is simply always a minority of people out at the edges of the bell? And what about the rest of the people, who live in the middle of that bell curve, who are normal? Why must they be separated?

Will That Be Milk, or Solids?

For most of us who find ourselves at the mystical end of the curve, life experience has taught us that those who dwell within the realm of normality are often not willing or able to understand many of the more profound concepts, for whatever reasons. It often seems that what they need is exactly what exoteric religion provides, simplified stories and concepts which can give meaning and purpose to their lives, but which the more mystically inclined would find lacking. Perhaps that is exactly why exoteric religion was created; at some point, the inheritors of the shamanic thread understood what Jesus expressed, when his disciples asked why he must speak in parables to the masses: because having ears, they cannot hear, and having eyes, they cannot see.

Masonic Symbolism

Of the many esoteric traditions, Freemasonry has served as an ideal refuge and vehicle for the mystically inclined. This is primarily because of its level of organization and practicality, which has facilitated its membership not just studying high concepts behind closed doors, but having a major influence on society at large, as well as a highly functional internal structure that allows us to be effective at getting things done. While the milk of parables is enough for most, for those who seek more solid food, we welcome sincere truth-seekers of every kind.

As always, this writing does not represent the official views of Universal Co-Masonry, but is simply the reflections of one Co-Mason.

When a new brother is in the beginning stages of his masonic journey, he is asked what I believe to be one of the most profound questions of all: “Where were you first prepared to be made a mason?”

As those of us in the fraternity know, the usual response is “my heart.” This turning of the heart is often said to be the beginning of the initiation process. But, why? What does the heart symbolize that is so important?

Plato spoke of the pumping of the valves of the heart as the origin of human passions. Aristotle offered a somewhat different explanation, claiming that it is not only the organ of passions but the resting place of the soul’s vital spirit. Freemasonry mirrors this philosophy attributing the heart as the sacred abode of the Inner Ruler Immortal.

In our modern world, the word “heart” is often downplayed to have to do with the feelings or temperament. We might hear of a heart that is stony, heavy, broken, foolish, warm, cold or bleeding. In the middle of February, the retail stores make a fortune on the heart motif.

Brother Manly Hall in “The Secret Teaching of All Ages” suggests that the common reference to the emotions when it comes to the heart is a blind. He says:

“While all the Mysteries recognized the heart as the center of spiritual consciousness, they often purposely ignored this concept and used the heart in its exoteric sense as the symbol of the emotional nature. The student of esotericism discovers ere long that the ancients often resorted to various blinds to conceal the true interpretations of their Mysteries.”

Blinds can no doubt lead a person astray. Brother Helena Blavatsky, for example, in the “Secret Doctrine” continually used enigmas, cryptograms, and other devices intended to conceal the real esoteric meaning from uninitiated readers. Never does she actually lie, but I have noticed when a topic seems too clear-cut, then I should be suspect.

So, what about the heart? Has our society oversimplified the concept only to conceal a blind? If so, what is the nature of that blind? Is it possible to grasp a glimpse of the heart’s mystery?

The Heart Symbol – Universally Understood

A journey through a number of the Volumes of Sacred Lore is as a way of exploring just a few of the many deeper meanings of this symbol.

In Buddhism, the heart is considered the center of enlightenment. The word “bodhicitta” translates to the pure awakened heart and mind within each person. Within “bodhicitta” is the aspiration for service to all beings as the longing to heal the sufferings of the world.

In Christianity, the Grail stories describe the human heart as a container of the heart of Christ whose life/blood grants nourishment to the soul. In the Bible, it is the heart to which Christ referred when he said “The Kingdom of God is within you.” (Luke 17:21)

In Hinduism, the Upanishads speak of what is known as the hridaya guha, or the cave of the heart, in which resides the Supreme Reality. In the eighth chapter it says to “Go into the cave and you find the treasures of heaven.”

In Islam, the basic Arabic word for heart is galb meaning change or transformation. It is considered the meeting place between the human and the celestial realms where spirit resides. The heart of the faithful is the “Throne (al-‘Arsh) of God the All-Merciful (ar-Rahman)”

In Judaism, the heart is the seat of wisdom, as the Psalmist wrote, “Teach us to number our days that we may attain a heart of wisdom.” (Psalm 90) The Holy of Holies in the temple in Jerusalem is considered to be a heart as was Jerusalem itself.

In Taoism, the heart is a vehicle of eternity, love, and divinity. Hazrat Inayat Khan says: “Realizing that love is a divine spark in one’s heart, one keeps blowing on that spark until a flame rises to illuminate the path of one’s life.”

In the Cosmology of Memphis, the heart was understood as a repository of the good deeds in a person’s life. If the heart was light as a feather, you passed the test of the Goddess Maat and were able to enter the afterlife.

One could go on almost indefinitely. In just a short survey, the heart symbol is seen as an important spiritual center, an inner shrine, a place that reflects the life and deeds of each person. It is often depicted with a flame.

Can any of these sacred teachings apply to a mason’s life?

The Masonic Heart on Fire

In Freemasonry, we learn about brotherly love which inflames the hearts of all true Masons. With that understanding comes the responsibility to lift and aid the downtrodden and to battle against the forces of fanaticism, ignorance, and tyranny. It is our duty to bring light to darkness.

A flaming heart is a symbol of this task and makes its appearance in more than one of the Scottish Rite Degrees. It represents a zeal for truth and doing what is right, even if it means self-sacrifice. Moving toward the fire of knowledge, of both ourselves and the world, is the path of every Mason whose heart burns within him. The whole degree system of freemasonry echoes the imagery of a fiery striving.

In the Agni Yoga book “Fiery Worlds” we read:

“A striving will, emanating from the fiery heart, creates a karmic wave which produces a vortex drawing in the corresponding energies.”

As the writings suggest, the striving fiery heart becomes magnetic. It then can bring into manifestation that which is willed. The highest striving originates not from the separate self, but from the divine. When our hearts begin to beat in unison with the heartbeat of the divine, we naturally enter into and become a part of the spiritual striving of the world.

A Freemason’s “first preparation” could definitely stand for a state of the emotions like zeal, aspiration, passion, motivation, etc. All well and good. In my mind, however, I envision that a flaming heart symbolizes something far more mysterious. It connects us to the spark of the sacred Fire within us. As the door is opened and expands, “the heart can conceive what the eyes could not behold.” We are truly enveloped with revelation, the beauty and splendor of which is beyond description. This is the perhaps when we truly realize the mystic tie that binds us all together.

“That which is a mystery shall no longer be so, and that which has been veiled will now be revealed: that which has been withdrawn will emerge into the light, and all men shall see and together they shall rejoice.” – Brother Alice Bailey

In Freemasonry, the term “brother” is used to demonstrate a closeness of relationship that is not necessarily based on blood ties. It is formed from a common bond, shared obligations and experiences. In addition, being a child of the Divine Father (or Great Architect) accounts for a sacred cemented kinship with each other.

Lately, the question, “am I my brother’s keeper?” has been echoing in my mind in terms of my own masonic obligations. This question goes to the foundation of what it means to be of service in the Great Work. The ultimate aim in masonic teachings is the mastery of self, through reflection, actions and acceptance of the sublime lessons of immortality. The student is encouraged to temper their emotions and control their vices and practice the tenets of brotherly love, relief and truth.

This line of thinking led me to revisit the story of Cain and Abel, and the actual source of the “brother’s keeper” phrase. As in any holy book like the bible, there is fair debate whether passages should be treated literally or as a malleable allegory. The seeming contradictions are common for writings that span over centuries. Each individual’s faith, academic viewpoint, view of religion, or personal worldview certainly comes into play in interpreting the text. I was hoping to find some masonic insight in this age- old bible story.

Basically, the passages from Genesis 4:1-16 can be summarized like this:

Cain was the first son of Adam and Eve and Abel was the second son. Cain was a farmer and Abel was a shepherd. When it came time to bring an offering to the Lord, Cain offered fruit and Abel offered a slain lamb. The Lord was satisfied with Abel’s offering, but unsatisfied in Cain’s. Cain, filled with jealousy, killed his brother.

After the murder, we read in Genesis 4:9:

The Lord said to Cain, “Where is Abel your brother?” He said, “I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?”

Things did not go well for Cain.

Translated from the original Hebrew, the word “keeper” refers to someone who “watches over,” or “guards.”

What is the symbolic meaning of these two characters? Could they relate to the quest of a Freemason?

Cain and Abel – From Darkness to Light

Some theories say that Cain and Abel were twins and each twin could represent our higher and lower natures. This speaks to the heart of the masonic work which is learning to navigate the duality of our existence. For example, there would be no light without darkness, no good without evil, no love without hate and so on.

Comparing light vs. darkness is an important study. However, what’s curious about the subject of light is that everyone knows what it is until you ask them. In the Bible we read that “God is light.” This quotation evokes a mystery. It suggests there is a deeper connection to the subject of light than meets the eye. It seems unlikely that when you go into a room and flip a switch, you are turning on God. Equally mysterious is the concept of darkness.

Recently, in a Lodge meeting we studied Brother Leonard Bosman’s work, “The Light of a Master Mason.” Bosman proposes that the myth of Cain and Abel is about the Freemason’s battle between two opposite aspects of mind. The grand struggle deals with the incompatibility of these two natures, especially when the ego is in control.

From “Light of a Master Mason” we read:

“Abel is the Love-Mind, Cain the Head or brain mind; Abel is the heart or spirit, Cain the earthly mentality. Hence it is that, symbolically as well as in actuality, Cain kills his brother Abel, that is to say, the hard Cain-like mind kills the pure love nature (Abel) when preventing it functioning.”

Bosman makes a good point that Abel is not the one struggling. The struggle is about Cain because the ego is always in a constant struggle to kill off the higher nature. The ego wants total control because to sacrifice the ego is to die to self and let the Light nature live through you. No easy task.

Both aspects of the mind have a function. Cain, according to the inner meaning of its etymology represents the hard, pointed weapon of the mind. Cain is the selfish, acquisitive mind, the “getter,” the “centralizer,” whilst Abel is the yielding one, the “giver.”

If this is all true, then how do we “master” these two aspects of our nature?

Tubal Cain – The Sharpener of Mentality

The symbolic key may lie in Tubal-Cain, a blacksmith character in the bible who was the son of Lamech, a descendant of Cain. He was known as an artificer in metals of brass and iron. In the legend, there is a biological connection as well as a symbolic one. Bosman writes that Freemasonry may be “thought of as an alchemical experiment, the Lodge in this sense being the Great Alchemist’s cauldron in which the base metal of the lower nature will be changed into the gold of the spiritual.”

Further on, in “Light of a Master Mason” we read:

“In all this the student of Freemasonry will see the inner and secret meaning of Tubal-Cain, the yielding of the central might or egoistic mind, the letting-go, as it were, of the personal self as it spreads out to become a greater self, the ONE that is in all.”

In other words, the more we cling to self-importance and ego, the more we are undoubtedly living in darkness.

The mystical worker will often cry, “When I’m nothing, I’m everything!” This might possibly be why so few people truly seek an authentic path to enlightenment. Who wants to be nothing? We’ve all been told the whole purpose is to be somebody.

We could draw two conclusions from all this. We could decide that the Cain and Abel legend is simply a good story — an illusory tale to tell our children. Or we can assume that it does have some merit in its symbolic import. I prefer the second option myself, if only because it jibes with my own intuition as a masonic worker that we can learn about ourselves from symbols.

Am I my Brother’s Keeper? Indeed, I try. “To make daily progress in masonic light” sounds simple, but it’s probably the hardest concept a Freemason has to learn. That’s OK, because it also offers a lifetime of value.

“What the sad world needs – what each of us needs – is more light, more love, more clarity of mind and more charity of heart; and this in copious measure is what Free Masonry gives us – if only we let the light of love enter the dark recesses of our hearts.” — Bro. Jyothindra Kumar

Freemasonry reveres the Light, which illuminates and chases away the darkness of ignorance. As a “bringer of light,” Lucifer can be a touchy subject, particularly in relation to Freemasonry, because Masons have been accused of devil worship by various groups, including conspiracy theorists. What follows is Part II of the post on the Archetypal Lucifer. [Part One can be read here.]

Where else does the Lucifer archetype manifest in humanity, both within and without, in culture and in self? From this point forward, I go beyond the factual, historical roots of Lucifer, and explore the concept more speculatively. Because Lucifer and Satan have been so conflated throughout history, I will refer to the merged concept as Lucifer-Satan. As always, this post is only the reflections of one mason, and does not represent the official views of Universal Co-Masonry.

Lucifer: Shadow and Light

As the Lucifer-Satan archetype is partly personified by a glorification of the intellect, I believe that one manifestation of it is the worldview of philosophical materialism, or scientism, the belief that all that is real are the phenomena we can measure and study with science. This worldview is personified by regarding only the the mental and the animal aspects of human existence as real, viewing humans as essentially a clever monkey ultimately made of meaningless space dust, and a corresponding rejection of spirit or immaterial aspects to reality or humanity. This fits quite well with the Lucifer-Satan archetype’s association with knowledge, moral relativist, or even nihilistic point of view, and position of opposition to religious authority.

However, I believe that to stop here would be a mistake; the purely objective intellect, regarding the world outside the finite self/mind as solely made up of dead and unconscious matter to be controlled for the perpetuation of mind and hedonistic pleasure is only one embodiment of this archetype. I believe that it exists beyond the boundaries of the materialists’ denial of all things “supernatural,” it is something more universal.

In fact, one of the places that the Lucifer-Satan archetype is alive and well most openly is within certain of the “dark” magical arts and practices, where Lucifer-Satan as a deity figure may at times be seen as an underdog of personal power and liberty, rejected by a spiritual authority seeking always to subjugate its creation. This loosely correlates also to a view shared by some branches of Gnosticism. All of these represent a view of Lucifer-Satan which goes beyond scientific materialism, clearly indicating that the archetype is more broad than that particular manifestation.

Masonic Interpretations of Lucifer

What about a masonic view of Lucifer? Manly P. Hall, famously wrote in his book The Lost Keys of Freemasonry:

When the Mason learns that the key to the warrior on the block is the proper application of the dynamo of living power, he has learned the mystery of his Craft. The seething energies of Lucifer are in his hands, and before he may step onward and upward, he must prove his ability to properly apply energy. He must follow in the footsteps of his forefather…. who with the mighty strength of the war god hammered his sword into a plowshare.

This passage has often been used as evidence by some to say that Freemasons are secretly a bunch of devil-worshipping satanists. It might even be enough to give a mason unfamiliar with it some pause; what exactly did Brother Hall mean by the “seething energies of Lucifer”?To an uninformed reader, and taken out of context, this statement might sound a bit nefarious, especially given the cultural context of the conflation of Lucifer and Satan, as an embodiment of evil.

More likely, Brother Hall is drawing upon a more Gnostic perspective on Lucifer, such as that it represents the latent life-force energy, described in the East as Kundalini, dwelling “underground” and in the “darkness” of lower aspects of the self (literally in the lower body), which can be stirred and lifted by certain practices to travel through the various energy centers. Another facet of some Gnostic views is that Lucifer is the other side of the Christ aspect of the self, which rings true based on the origins of the archetype. If Lucifer/Satan is the primary antagonist of the story from which the archetype originates, we shouldn’t ignore the role of the protagonist, and all that he represents, as well. So, how does Lucifer relate to Christ, in the self?

This Gnostic account of Lucifer is as both carrier of the light, and tempter of the divine self represented by Christ; indeed, Satan (the “adversary” angel, in Hebrew) did tempt Christ during his fast in the forest, in the biblical account. This view posits that Lucifer represents both the energy within the self, and the temptation to waste that energy, working together with Christ in an antagonistic interplay within the self, to raise up and purify the fundamental raw potency contained in the lower half of the person, the generative organs and the gut. This paints an image of Lucifer as a force which ensures purity in the self, just as he was the prosecutor of Job to test his faith, in the old testament.

Alchemically, we could say perhaps that this is like an acid or solvent, which eats away all that is not gold. As such, this idea of Lucifer is as a force which guarantees that the self has evolved beyond the desires and temptations of the lower aspects of our animal nature before allowing it to become possessed of divine radiance, by tempting it at every turn. This includes the temptations which come at the highest levels of development.

Satan as Lucifer’s Folly?

Some masonic authors have extended an explanation that Lucifer and Satan are not the same, but are two very different ideas which have been conflated due to translation errors and historical inaccuracies, as alluded to earlier in this post. By this account, the term Lucifer is exactly what the etymology of the word implies: an archetypal Light Bearer, a bearer of spiritual Light, which would be represented by any of the known Light Bearers of history, including Jesus Christ himself, and is what each Freemason aspires to be. Essentially, it is the idea that a person can serve as a bridge between the divine and man, that an individual can be the bearer of God’s Light for the world, perhaps after undergoing the temptation/purification process described by the Gnostics.

I find this to be an inherently satisfying and rational explanation, but I also find myself feeling the need to take pause, before becoming too complacent with this particular understanding. Reflecting upon all that has happened with the idea of Lucifer, chiefly becoming conflated with the embodiment of all evil, one has to wonder: perhaps the archetype of Lucifer-Satan is more meaningful than simply being a human error in the interpretation of scriptures and other texts? Perhaps Lucifer-Satan is, indeed, an archetype of a fallen Light Bearer?

Warning from the Sutras

One embodiment of this which I believe may lend some clarity is in the Yoga Sutras of Patanjali. A particular description is given of those advanced Yogis who attained abilities which we would identify as psychic powers, or siddhis in Sanskrit, through the practice of extreme concentration, or Samadhi, but without overcoming the personal attachments of their baser nature and desires. Having not given proper attention to the taming of the lower self before attaining Samadhi, the selfish and attached mind that had achieved the siddhis became lost in the fulfillment of their desires. In other words, they learned to use their inherent divine capabilities, without attaining true wisdom. Ultimately, this results in their merging with the object of their desires at the end of their mortal life, and being locked into the material world itself as a kind of elemental spirit, rather than achieving liberation. This is also very similar to the dark shaman.

I think that this idea encapsulates the essence of the Lucifer-Satan archetype quite well, even resonating with the theme of his being cast down and bound to matter. Just like Prometheus being bound to the stone, or Lucifer-Satan being cast into Hell, this fall from grace of the Light Bearer could be an archetypal warning against the perils of succumbing to one’s own ego-based attachments and lower nature, as one advances along the spiritual path. This would include the desire for and fixation on sense pleasures, power, control, and positions of superiority.

If I attempt to distill this idea down to its essence, it might be something like: “The limited self attempting to become God, without realizing that it already is.” It’s the attempt of the finite self to have God-like perception and power, but without sacrificing all of the entrapments of the finite self’s desires, attachments, and need for control. This is the desire to be the ultimate divinely ordained King, Ruler of the Universe, and to think that one knows better than the silent, seemingly passive transcendent God. As pointed out by Manly P. Hall, mythically, this transition occurred the moment when Lucifer thought that he knew better than God how to operate creation, and that he should take over. On the other hand, in the story of Christ, it was surpassed the moment that Christ was offered this position, but turned it down.

Lucifer and the Temptation of Christ

One symbolic representation of Lucifer-Satan could be the crowned animal, the combination of the dynamo of the unrefined lower self with the mind awoken to its true potential, without the crucial mediating and transforming influence of the Heart. After all, Lucifer/Satan has been depicted as cunning, seductive, powerful, brilliant, and intriguing, but there is one quality that Lucifer-Satan rarely embodies in any depiction of him with which I’m familiar, and that is selfless Love. Loving kindness, compassion, humility, and surrender to the greater Self of which the finite self is merely an extension, is the one critical quality which Lucifer-Satan seems to lack, and which is ultimately what binds him and all who embody him to being King of This World, as he is sometimes referred to in the Bible. At the same time, it is the quality most essential to Christ. Does that make Christ the true Lucifer, the true Light Bearer?

Perhaps this is also the ultimate temptation with which we are presented, at our highest stages of spiritual development. Because when one does truly become a Light Bearer, and become possessed of corresponding expanded awareness and capabilities, the temptation to use it for selfish ends has to be one of the single greatest obstacles imaginable. We can see this manifesting in many forms, such as using the light of the intellect to build technological methods to control and manipulate nature and other people, the exertion of the light of magical will to satisfy one’s own self-centered desires, spiritually exalting one’s own ego in spiritual materialism, or in gaining material wealth and power over others.

In the end, all are the attempts of the finite self or ego to become God-like, or rather, to become like a false notion of God, as a King or Ruler on a throne, a finite entity with infinite capabilities. It’s fundamentally a refusal to realize and accept one’s place as an illusory appendage of the Infinite One, meant to act in harmony with all of Creation, and to utilize one’s gifts as a self-less Light Bearer in service to humanity. At whatever level it occurs in our development, we always have the temptation to place the will of the self over the will and well-being of others, this being perhaps the fundamental essence of evil, which ultimately culminates in the utilization of others as extensions of the self to fulfill one’s own desires.

Would You Pass?

Here’s an interesting question: If you were to be granted all the Power of This World today, would you pass The Test? Would you be able to resist the temptation to use your control over the illusory world to endlessly fulfill your own desires? Would you choose to surrender to the larger plan, which even with all your knowledge you can never fully comprehend, and to use your abilities only to heal and enlighten others, never to control them or inflict harm, or even your own brand of justice? Would you, in spite of all your power, forgive the ignorant even as they nailed your hands to the cross, rendering your Heart wide open and undefended?

The great Light Bearers of history have given us examples for how to walk the tightrope forward, to resist the temptations of power, and become the selfless servants that humanity needs. Nobody said it would be easy; in fact, its probably the most difficult thing that anyone can do. Perhaps this is why the ability to die and be reborn is such a critical component of freemasonry, as well as mythology in general. We must be able to die to the false self, and all of its desires and fears, if we ever wish to be worthy Bearers of the Light.